Linux Company SUSE Outbids Competitors for Fast-growing Startup Rancher Labs (cnbc.com) 15
SUSE, a Linux distribution company controlled by private equity firm EQT, has agreed to acquire Rancher Labs, a start-up with technology that helps organizations run software in virtual containers across many servers. From a report: The companies announced the deal Wednesday but didn't disclose the terms. Two people familiar with the deal said SUSE is paying $600 million to $700 million. The transaction suggests that even during a recession, demand remains high for technology that can enable companies to operate more efficiently. Talks between the companies began in the spring, and the process became competitive with additional bids, Ursheet Parikh, a partner at Rancher backer Mayfield Fund, told CNBC on Tuesday. There were "lots of Zoom calls," Parikh said. In the past few years, with the rise of start-ups such as Docker, containers became a trendy alternative to more traditional virtualization technology for running applications on each computer server in a company data center. Amazon, Microsoft and other cloud providers came out with services that developers can use to place code in containers, and in 2017 SUSE introduced its own service for managing containers. The companies haven't finalized integration plans as the deal still faces regulatory approval.
I haven't heard about SUSE in a while (Score:2)
I thought that Redhat and Ubuntu had made them unprofitable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What? SUSE is still a thing? (Score:2)
Re: What? SUSE is still a thing? (Score:2)
What exactly is more "gross" about them then about e.g. ... RedHat ... of all monstrosities?
Serious question.
What old wives tales from the 90s/2000s were passed on to you through a thousand Chinese telephone delay lines?
Re: (Score:2)
SuSE has a bit of a history of turning on unstable features by default, e.g. using ReiserFS for root filesystem on new installs. It's decent if you have a competent IT department to manage things or you're an enthusiast, but I wouldn't recommend it for the general public.
Re: (Score:1)
Good Luck ! (Score:2)
I wish SuSE Good Luck !
Rancher and all the products in their ecosystem are nice and good, easy to deploy and decently documented but:
- A bit outdated - they only support the security nightmare that is Docker - zero support for CRI-O containers yet;
- Based on the names appearing on the code commits and ticket replies, they have a very small team working on the products. VERY small.
If they fix those two thinks, the'll be able to be a good competitor for RedHat OpenShift.
Re: Good Luck ! (Score:1)
I'd rather have 5 high quality full time experienced programmers than a thousand part time code monkeys.
Quality counts.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather have 5 high quality full time experienced programmers than a thousand part time code monkeys.
Quality counts.
That may be true, but I doubt those are the only two options.
Re: Good Luck ! (Score:1)
Absolutely not but I'm just replying to the comment about a really tiny team. I'm making the bold assumption the team is 5-10 people and they're all really good or the project never would have launched.
Could a team of 50 semi decent people do it? Sure with tight standards and coding practices and QA in place.
Could 1000 semi trained part time code monkeys? Probably not ever.
Re: (Score:1)
Rancher Lab's product k3s contains cri-o for more than a year now: https://github.com/rancher/k3s... [github.com]
Rancher has partial support for importing existing clusters with cri-o according to: https://github.com/rancher/ran... [github.com]
Cri-o is on the roadmap for Rancher Kubernetes Engine 2.x according to: https://github.com/rancher/rke... [github.com]
A strange world this is.... (Score:2)
So called "professionals" usind "cloud providers" and "containers" like it was not a thing of insane cluelessness and clueless insanity...
I wonder if kids that get into tech nowadays, even laugh at marketing nonsense like "cloud" anymore, or are even aware of the privacy and reliability implications...
Re: (Score:2)
Like it or not, but PaaS and SaaS are very popular and appear to be here to stay for the foreseeable future. There are some benefits, such as being able to get web apps up in running and shared among developers without worrying about the server end of things. While all of that can be done in-house, it can save time and money by having servers just run by server guys. It's basic division of labor. If you can do something on a large scale that clients have to do on a small scale, odds are they can pay less to
Re: (Score:2)
or are even aware of the privacy and reliability implications...
But that's not even close to the effective reality. Privacy? Reliability? Pshaw, those small nits are easily succumbed by the glorious "outsourcing of responsibility."
*I* just worry about my app, they worry about all of that other bothersome stuff. ALL of that other stuff; it makes my life so much simpler. See? I've got a piece of paper (well, I took a screenshot) that says they'll do a good job. What more can you even want?